Hi All,
I'm writing up an adventure that is set in an iron age world.
I'd like battles to work about the same way in the campaign as they did in the real ancient world. So I want chariots, elephants, and some artillery but I want battles to be decided mainly by infantry fighting in close order.
It seems like magic is going to cause me trouble with that. Grease and Entangle are really going to play havoc with a phalanx or maniple.
I was thinking that maybe if I tweaked the magic rules to make counterspelling easier I could achieve the effect that I'm looking for. Any ideas?
Help with ancient world campaign D&D 3.5
-
Rovinpiper
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:12 am
- Location: Occupied CSA
- Contact:
Magic makes any form of melee/archery obsolete. That's the way it is in D&D.
That aside, you might try making dispelling an Immediate Action, and maybe allow it with any spell of one level higher. (Maybe with an opposed caster level roll, with bonuses based on casting stat or ranks in spellcraft.)
Also, check out Heroes of Battle: plenty of advice for incorporating big battles in D&D.
That aside, you might try making dispelling an Immediate Action, and maybe allow it with any spell of one level higher. (Maybe with an opposed caster level roll, with bonuses based on casting stat or ranks in spellcraft.)
Also, check out Heroes of Battle: plenty of advice for incorporating big battles in D&D.
-
Rovinpiper
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:12 am
- Location: Occupied CSA
- Contact:
I think armies would be quite keen to enlist magic users. Chances are pretty high that quite a percentage of commanders/generals/rulers will be high level magic users, who will either command their armies themselves, or be thoroughly aware of the advantage a magicuser commander would bring. Hence, they'd have made sure there would be an ample supply. (Academies, scholarships, etc.)Rovinpiper wrote:If magic users are sufficiently rare then conventional weapons woujld not be obsolete, don't you think.
If there is one spellcaster per 1000 people able to bear arms and the spellcasters' average level is say 3rd, then there is still a place for traditional armies.
The role of armies woudn't be played out, however, since magic users would still be rare. However, in the battles where they do participate, they will probably dominate.
Heroes of Battles uses a much higher ratio of casters to noncasters, if I look at the squads. In high-magic worlds such as Eberron, the ratio is even higher.
So, either play in Grayhawk (the setting), or make your own setting. Be aware that if a players plays a spellcaster and participates in a battle, he will probably decide it on its own. (If he has reached a certain level.)
Well you could limit spell casting to something that more accurately fits in with how it was thought to opperate, which is generally low key.
This leads you with 2 options
A) Either limit spells to lower power and describe it in terms of fluff that makes it seem only mildly magical. Like if someone loses a limb, rather than using cure light wounds to heal them use something like Leech-craft and sewing to re-attach the limb. Or perhaps they have salves and powders they prepare for this sort of situation.
Necromancy, for example, rather than summoning skeletons and such could perhaps instead only summon up ghosts to possess people, or bring the dead back to life so you can interrogate them for a short period ect...
B) Make magic a sort of special "gift" that players can be talented with. Like make the magic so powerful and rare it becomes like a feat, perhaps only available at character creation.
Here's an example:
Premonition
Requires a minimum wisdom of 15
You were born with the ability to foresee possible near future events of great importance that effect you. These dreams usually tend to come true unless you act upon them and tend to reflect whatever is important in your life.
Basically with this everytime the character goes into a deep sleep, they may ask about a certain event like the fate of a loved one or the outcome of a battle, You, the DM, roll a d20+wisdom modifier vs DC 20. If they pass you reveal a shady hint of something that you plan in the future assuming your PCs didn't exist. For example the loved one might get assassinated if the PCs just disappeared off the face of the planet. If they fail, make up something.
It doesn't always have to be important, for example they could pass and you could mention that their loved one is sleeping safe and soundly, or if they fail they dreamt of them dying a brutal death.
So yeah, it's powerful in a sense, but it's not overwhelming and it's definitely equal to a feat especially if traditonal magic is nixed.
Finally:
Also, you should make most spellcaster seem evil with the exception of a very select few, such as the oracles and... um yeah that's pretty much it. Most of your magicians should probably be shady druids, witches or sorcerrers. Basically pledging allegiance to mostly themeselves and only aiding other armies and nations if it works towards their grander plans. Something like a Big Bad perhaps, or maybe treat them like a devil. Depending how important the PC's are the sorcerrer might appear to offer his services to aid them in the upcoming battle or give them a cursed, but powerful weapon, like a berserker sword. In exchange for favors later or in order to gain your trust.
That is if you want to run spellcasters accurately to how they were in literature at the time.
This leads you with 2 options
A) Either limit spells to lower power and describe it in terms of fluff that makes it seem only mildly magical. Like if someone loses a limb, rather than using cure light wounds to heal them use something like Leech-craft and sewing to re-attach the limb. Or perhaps they have salves and powders they prepare for this sort of situation.
Necromancy, for example, rather than summoning skeletons and such could perhaps instead only summon up ghosts to possess people, or bring the dead back to life so you can interrogate them for a short period ect...
B) Make magic a sort of special "gift" that players can be talented with. Like make the magic so powerful and rare it becomes like a feat, perhaps only available at character creation.
Here's an example:
Premonition
Requires a minimum wisdom of 15
You were born with the ability to foresee possible near future events of great importance that effect you. These dreams usually tend to come true unless you act upon them and tend to reflect whatever is important in your life.
Basically with this everytime the character goes into a deep sleep, they may ask about a certain event like the fate of a loved one or the outcome of a battle, You, the DM, roll a d20+wisdom modifier vs DC 20. If they pass you reveal a shady hint of something that you plan in the future assuming your PCs didn't exist. For example the loved one might get assassinated if the PCs just disappeared off the face of the planet. If they fail, make up something.
It doesn't always have to be important, for example they could pass and you could mention that their loved one is sleeping safe and soundly, or if they fail they dreamt of them dying a brutal death.
So yeah, it's powerful in a sense, but it's not overwhelming and it's definitely equal to a feat especially if traditonal magic is nixed.
Finally:
Also, you should make most spellcaster seem evil with the exception of a very select few, such as the oracles and... um yeah that's pretty much it. Most of your magicians should probably be shady druids, witches or sorcerrers. Basically pledging allegiance to mostly themeselves and only aiding other armies and nations if it works towards their grander plans. Something like a Big Bad perhaps, or maybe treat them like a devil. Depending how important the PC's are the sorcerrer might appear to offer his services to aid them in the upcoming battle or give them a cursed, but powerful weapon, like a berserker sword. In exchange for favors later or in order to gain your trust.
That is if you want to run spellcasters accurately to how they were in literature at the time.
Making spellcasters evil would lead to them even meddling more in politics and warfare, since they wouldn't have moral qualms about applying their significant power for personal gains.
Even the entire overhaul is more work than it warrants.
The OP's own suggestion about improving counterspelling has a good chance of succeeding, and his second idea about reducing the ratio of spellcasters would also work, but wouldn't apply to the battles where casters *are* involved.
Even the entire overhaul is more work than it warrants.
The OP's own suggestion about improving counterspelling has a good chance of succeeding, and his second idea about reducing the ratio of spellcasters would also work, but wouldn't apply to the battles where casters *are* involved.
Well if you want make magic pretty much stay the same but not constantly be a threat you could use something similar to Warhammer rules, but with skill checks.
You could make it so everytime a wizard needs to cast a spell, considering they need concentration and considering they're in a stressful noisy battlefield they need to make a concentration check DC 10+spell level, if they pass the spell gets cast unless...
The other army has a spellcaster who may make a dispel or counterspell by making a spellcraft check DC to beat being the user's concentration check as it was rolled.
Spellcasters can only block 1 spellcaster per turn. So if one army has 2 spellcasters while the defender has only one, they'd need to choose which person they choose to block wisely.
Quick examples,
example 1: Red team 1 mage, Blue team 0 mages
Red mage casts magic missile, he rolls a concentration check (DC 11), if he passes, spell cast.
example 2: Red team 1 mage, Blue team 1 mage
Red mage casts Fireball, he rolls a concentration check (DC 13), if he passes, let's say with a 15 the blue mage may block his spell using a spellcraft check (DC 15).
example 3: Red team 2 mages, Blue team 1 mage
Red mage 1 casts magic missile, he rolls a concentration check (DC 11), and rolls an 18, the defenders have only one blue mage, and thus only one spell may be blocked per turn.
So he could A) attempt to roll a spellcraft check (DC 18) to block the spell
or
B) hold off thinking perhaps the next mage will roll lower on concentration and thus be easier to block or will flat out fail casting the spell based on concentration.
That's the last idea of how to incorporate army wizards without adding too many mechanics and still giving a reasonable defence against magic so that a single wizard spell doesn't devastate an army constantly.
You could make it so everytime a wizard needs to cast a spell, considering they need concentration and considering they're in a stressful noisy battlefield they need to make a concentration check DC 10+spell level, if they pass the spell gets cast unless...
The other army has a spellcaster who may make a dispel or counterspell by making a spellcraft check DC to beat being the user's concentration check as it was rolled.
Spellcasters can only block 1 spellcaster per turn. So if one army has 2 spellcasters while the defender has only one, they'd need to choose which person they choose to block wisely.
Quick examples,
example 1: Red team 1 mage, Blue team 0 mages
Red mage casts magic missile, he rolls a concentration check (DC 11), if he passes, spell cast.
example 2: Red team 1 mage, Blue team 1 mage
Red mage casts Fireball, he rolls a concentration check (DC 13), if he passes, let's say with a 15 the blue mage may block his spell using a spellcraft check (DC 15).
example 3: Red team 2 mages, Blue team 1 mage
Red mage 1 casts magic missile, he rolls a concentration check (DC 11), and rolls an 18, the defenders have only one blue mage, and thus only one spell may be blocked per turn.
So he could A) attempt to roll a spellcraft check (DC 18) to block the spell
or
B) hold off thinking perhaps the next mage will roll lower on concentration and thus be easier to block or will flat out fail casting the spell based on concentration.
That's the last idea of how to incorporate army wizards without adding too many mechanics and still giving a reasonable defence against magic so that a single wizard spell doesn't devastate an army constantly.
-
Rovinpiper
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:12 am
- Location: Occupied CSA
- Contact:
I don't understand how requiring a skill check will make it easier for casters compared to noncasters. There's no new advantage given to casters and no new disadvantage to the noncasters.GawainBS wrote:Skill checks are too easy to optimise: if anything, you'd be making it easier for casters.
Please explain.
Because it's so easy (via feats, class abilities, spells themselves, items, etc.) to get a high skill check. Hence, you're not restricting magic in the least. It would be more sensible to make the skillcheck progressively difficult with each spell cast, but the impact of that would also be minimal, since casters typically only need one or two spells per encounter to finish the encounter.Rovinpiper wrote:I don't understand how requiring a skill check will make it easier for casters compared to noncasters. There's no new advantage given to casters and no new disadvantage to the noncasters.
Please explain.
-
Rovinpiper
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:12 am
- Location: Occupied CSA
- Contact:
No, it's not possible to counterspell a higher level spell than you can cast.
Yes, you do have to spend spell slots.
Keep in mind to define what kind of action is takes to dispel: a readied action, an immediate action? Immediate action would make it very, very useful and powerful, yet tactical, since you would have spent your swift action for the coming turn.
Also keep in mind that skill checks are so easy to maximise, that rolling them at 10 + spell level, or something close to that, becomes unnecessary. I'm more for using caster level, since it represents raw magical power better. Otherwise, a bunch of pretty low lvl casters can easily lock down a much higher level caster.
An alternative is to make the skillchecks opposed, if you're deadset on using skills.
Yes, you do have to spend spell slots.
Keep in mind to define what kind of action is takes to dispel: a readied action, an immediate action? Immediate action would make it very, very useful and powerful, yet tactical, since you would have spent your swift action for the coming turn.
Also keep in mind that skill checks are so easy to maximise, that rolling them at 10 + spell level, or something close to that, becomes unnecessary. I'm more for using caster level, since it represents raw magical power better. Otherwise, a bunch of pretty low lvl casters can easily lock down a much higher level caster.
An alternative is to make the skillchecks opposed, if you're deadset on using skills.
-
Rovinpiper
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:12 am
- Location: Occupied CSA
- Contact:
I think that should work for a counterspelling system. I need to determine the effects of formations that form shield walls. My ideas include:
A moderate bonus to fortitude saves.
A small penalty to reflex saves.
A large bonus to AC against missile attacks.
A moderate bonus against attacks with swinging melee weapons. (Note: I did not say slashing and bludgeoning weapons because the pick is a piercing weapon but it is used in a swinging motion.)
A small bonus against attacks with thrusting weapons.
A bonus against bullrush and overrun attacks for formations with interlocking shields in the front rank.
A penalty to attacks made with swinging weapons by members of the shield wall.
I want to handle infantry first, but then I'll need to worry about more mobile troops.
I'll need to figure out rules regarding chariots and elephants.
Horse cavalry also need some attention since the horses are not large enough to carry a heavily armored man and stirrups are not invented.
What are your ideas?
A moderate bonus to fortitude saves.
A small penalty to reflex saves.
A large bonus to AC against missile attacks.
A moderate bonus against attacks with swinging melee weapons. (Note: I did not say slashing and bludgeoning weapons because the pick is a piercing weapon but it is used in a swinging motion.)
A small bonus against attacks with thrusting weapons.
A bonus against bullrush and overrun attacks for formations with interlocking shields in the front rank.
A penalty to attacks made with swinging weapons by members of the shield wall.
I want to handle infantry first, but then I'll need to worry about more mobile troops.
I'll need to figure out rules regarding chariots and elephants.
Horse cavalry also need some attention since the horses are not large enough to carry a heavily armored man and stirrups are not invented.
What are your ideas?
My idea is that you should track down Heroes of Battle: it has ideas and rules for 90% of what you're trying to do.
Shieldwall should give bonuses to reflex saves, since it provides cover.
I wouldn't go for the swinging meleeweapons rule, because it'll overburden your game and lead to discussion as to what such a weapon is.
Shieldwall should give bonuses to reflex saves, since it provides cover.
I wouldn't go for the swinging meleeweapons rule, because it'll overburden your game and lead to discussion as to what such a weapon is.
-
Rovinpiper
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:12 am
- Location: Occupied CSA
- Contact:
I looked at Heroes of Battle online a little. I wasn't impressed enough to buy it. I don't want a shield wall feat. I don't think it requires that much expertise.
As for slowing down the game, I intend to give only a vague description of the effects of different tactics and so on on game mechanics. Also, I intend to roll all of the dice. As a player I find it more interesting when I'm not really sure how many hit points I have or what this guys AC is.
I want my players to think for themselves about what they are doing instead of just using the tactics and techniques mentioned in the rules. Basically, if you can explain why the tactic or...(screw it I'm using a military acronym. TTP = Tactics, techniques, and Procedures)...TTP that you are using should earn you a bonus in this situation I'll give you a bonus.
I don't see the potential for much argument on whether a weapon is a swinging or a thrusting weapon. And it is such a key concept. It also makes details that are, just fluff in most games important. For instance a spike on top of a mace is just decoration in most games, but if the character wielding it finds himself in a regular order shield wall, it may be worthwhile to stab with it.
So here are my ideas for the effects of formations.
Regular order describes troops massed closely, but with a little space, less than a foot between men. The shields do not overlap which allows them to thrust with short swords or spears underhand. This is the spacing used by Roman legionaries.
In close order, the men overlap their shields. This means that they have to strike with spears held up over their shoulder. This is the spacing of the Greek Phalanx.
The testudo (tortoise) is a Roman army formation for withstanding projectile barrages. The front rank shields prevent the men from being shot from the front while those in the subsequent ranks hold their shields up over their heads and overlap them. This formation is no use against melee attacks, so I haven't included stats for the testudo in melee.
Effects or Formation
A bonus to reflex saves. +2 (Regular order) / +3 (Close order) / +4 (testudo)
A large bonus to AC against missile attacks. +3 / +4 / +6
A moderate bonus against attacks with swinging melee weapons. (Note: I did not say slashing and bludgeoning weapons because the pick is a piercing weapon but it is used in a swinging motion.) +2 / +3
A small bonus against attacks with thrusting weapons. +1 / +1
A bonus against bullrush and overrun attacks for formations with interlocking shields in the front rank. +0 / +2
A penalty to attacks made with swinging weapons by members of the shield wall. -1 / -2
As for slowing down the game, I intend to give only a vague description of the effects of different tactics and so on on game mechanics. Also, I intend to roll all of the dice. As a player I find it more interesting when I'm not really sure how many hit points I have or what this guys AC is.
I want my players to think for themselves about what they are doing instead of just using the tactics and techniques mentioned in the rules. Basically, if you can explain why the tactic or...(screw it I'm using a military acronym. TTP = Tactics, techniques, and Procedures)...TTP that you are using should earn you a bonus in this situation I'll give you a bonus.
I don't see the potential for much argument on whether a weapon is a swinging or a thrusting weapon. And it is such a key concept. It also makes details that are, just fluff in most games important. For instance a spike on top of a mace is just decoration in most games, but if the character wielding it finds himself in a regular order shield wall, it may be worthwhile to stab with it.
So here are my ideas for the effects of formations.
Regular order describes troops massed closely, but with a little space, less than a foot between men. The shields do not overlap which allows them to thrust with short swords or spears underhand. This is the spacing used by Roman legionaries.
In close order, the men overlap their shields. This means that they have to strike with spears held up over their shoulder. This is the spacing of the Greek Phalanx.
The testudo (tortoise) is a Roman army formation for withstanding projectile barrages. The front rank shields prevent the men from being shot from the front while those in the subsequent ranks hold their shields up over their heads and overlap them. This formation is no use against melee attacks, so I haven't included stats for the testudo in melee.
Effects or Formation
A bonus to reflex saves. +2 (Regular order) / +3 (Close order) / +4 (testudo)
A large bonus to AC against missile attacks. +3 / +4 / +6
A moderate bonus against attacks with swinging melee weapons. (Note: I did not say slashing and bludgeoning weapons because the pick is a piercing weapon but it is used in a swinging motion.) +2 / +3
A small bonus against attacks with thrusting weapons. +1 / +1
A bonus against bullrush and overrun attacks for formations with interlocking shields in the front rank. +0 / +2
A penalty to attacks made with swinging weapons by members of the shield wall. -1 / -2
-
Rovinpiper
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:12 am
- Location: Occupied CSA
- Contact:
Alright then, moving right along...
A comprehensive list of the available weapons seems like the next thing to handle. So here is a list of weapons by skill level (simple, martial, exotic) and weight. Below that I have started my charts for the game metrics for each weapon. I've added the metric "motion" to describe whether the weapon is swung or thrust.
I welcome your thoughts.
Simple Weapons
Light
Pugio, dagger
Sica, curved dagger
Baton
Switch
Thrown rock
One-handed
Weighted club
Mace, light
Mace, Heavy
Morning Star
Hammer, light
Hammer, heavy
Dory, spear
Hasta, spear
Verutum, javelin
Atlatl
-Dart
Two-handed
Quarterstaff
Dory, Spear
Hasta, spear
Martial
Light
Gladius, short sword
Xiphos, broad sword
Kukri
Throwing axe
Hand axe
Sling
-stone
War flail, light
Sickle
Scourge
One-handed
Spatha, long sword
Battle axe
War flail, heavy
Falcata
Trident
Two-handed
Sarissa, pike
Great Axe
Great Club
Scythe
Maul
Falx
Exotic
Light
Sai
Jitte
Kama
Shuriken
Chakara
-Bracelet
-Headband
-Necklace
Boomerang
-Hunting
-War
One-handed
Net
Bola
Whip
Dwarven waraxe
Gnome hooked hammer
Two-handed
Blowgun
-needles
Manuballista
-bolts
-stones
Simple Weapons
Light
Weapon
cost weight type motion range damage Critical
Small Medium
Pugio, dagger 2 1 P T 20 1d3 1d4 19-20/x2
Sica, curved dagger 3 2 S/P T/S -- 1d3 1d4 19-20/x3
Baton 0.05 4 B S 20 1d3 1d4 X2
Switch1 0 1 B S -- 1d2 1d2 X2
Thrown rock 0.01 1 B N/A 30 1d2 1d3 X2
One-Handed
Weapon
Cost Weight Type Motion Range Damage Critical
Small Medium
Weighted club 0.5 5 B S 20 1d4 1d6
X2
Mace, light 4 6 B S 10 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
Mace, Heavy 6 8 B S -- 1d6+1 2d4 X2
Hammer, light 5 6 B S 10 1d4+1 1d6+1 X3
Hammer, heavy 8 8 B S -- 1d6+1 2d4 X3
Dory, spear 8 5 P T -- 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
--Two-handed 8 5 P T -- 1d6 1d8 X2
Hasta, spear 6 4 P T 20 1d4 1d6 X2
--Two-handed 6 4 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
Verutum, javelin 3 3 P T 30 1d3 1d4 X2
--Two-handed 3 3 1d4 1d4+1 X2
Dart 2 2 P -- 30 1d3 1d4 X2
--Atlatl2 1 1 30 1d4 1d6 X2
1Inflicts nonlethal damage.
2Used to throw darts, Makes darts projectile weapons instead of thrown weapons.
A comprehensive list of the available weapons seems like the next thing to handle. So here is a list of weapons by skill level (simple, martial, exotic) and weight. Below that I have started my charts for the game metrics for each weapon. I've added the metric "motion" to describe whether the weapon is swung or thrust.
I welcome your thoughts.
Simple Weapons
Light
Pugio, dagger
Sica, curved dagger
Baton
Switch
Thrown rock
One-handed
Weighted club
Mace, light
Mace, Heavy
Morning Star
Hammer, light
Hammer, heavy
Dory, spear
Hasta, spear
Verutum, javelin
Atlatl
-Dart
Two-handed
Quarterstaff
Dory, Spear
Hasta, spear
Martial
Light
Gladius, short sword
Xiphos, broad sword
Kukri
Throwing axe
Hand axe
Sling
-stone
War flail, light
Sickle
Scourge
One-handed
Spatha, long sword
Battle axe
War flail, heavy
Falcata
Trident
Two-handed
Sarissa, pike
Great Axe
Great Club
Scythe
Maul
Falx
Exotic
Light
Sai
Jitte
Kama
Shuriken
Chakara
-Bracelet
-Headband
-Necklace
Boomerang
-Hunting
-War
One-handed
Net
Bola
Whip
Dwarven waraxe
Gnome hooked hammer
Two-handed
Blowgun
-needles
Manuballista
-bolts
-stones
Simple Weapons
Light
Weapon
cost weight type motion range damage Critical
Small Medium
Pugio, dagger 2 1 P T 20 1d3 1d4 19-20/x2
Sica, curved dagger 3 2 S/P T/S -- 1d3 1d4 19-20/x3
Baton 0.05 4 B S 20 1d3 1d4 X2
Switch1 0 1 B S -- 1d2 1d2 X2
Thrown rock 0.01 1 B N/A 30 1d2 1d3 X2
One-Handed
Weapon
Cost Weight Type Motion Range Damage Critical
Small Medium
Weighted club 0.5 5 B S 20 1d4 1d6
X2
Mace, light 4 6 B S 10 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
Mace, Heavy 6 8 B S -- 1d6+1 2d4 X2
Hammer, light 5 6 B S 10 1d4+1 1d6+1 X3
Hammer, heavy 8 8 B S -- 1d6+1 2d4 X3
Dory, spear 8 5 P T -- 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
--Two-handed 8 5 P T -- 1d6 1d8 X2
Hasta, spear 6 4 P T 20 1d4 1d6 X2
--Two-handed 6 4 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
Verutum, javelin 3 3 P T 30 1d3 1d4 X2
--Two-handed 3 3 1d4 1d4+1 X2
Dart 2 2 P -- 30 1d3 1d4 X2
--Atlatl2 1 1 30 1d4 1d6 X2
1Inflicts nonlethal damage.
2Used to throw darts, Makes darts projectile weapons instead of thrown weapons.
I really would abandon the whole "swing/trust" idea; it just adds too much bookkeeping. The combat in D&D is also too abstracted to take it in account. (For example: each medium combatant takes up a 5*5 ft square, which gives him all the room he needs. If you want to "update" the rules to reflect your formations accuratly, this space will be smaller, which would make the combatants count as squeezing.
Also, drop the extra damage from wielding a weapon twohanded: 1.5x STR is there for that, as is 2x PA damage. In short: twohanded fighting is already powerful enough.
Also, drop the extra damage from wielding a weapon twohanded: 1.5x STR is there for that, as is 2x PA damage. In short: twohanded fighting is already powerful enough.
-
Rovinpiper
- Posts: 10
- Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 11:12 am
- Location: Occupied CSA
- Contact:
I'm keeping the swing/thrust concept. It's just too critical to the dynamics of this sort of combat.
What is PA damage?
Perhaps you are right about dropping the one-hand / two-hand idea. I'll revise with that taken into account.
Anyway, here is some more material to look over.
Thanks!
Two-Handed
Weapon
Cost Weight Type Motion Range Damage Critical
Small Medium
Quarterstaff 0.5 6 B S -- 1d4+1 1d6+1 X3
Great Club 4 10 B S -- 1d6+1 2d4 X3
Martial Weapons
Weapon
Cost Weight Type Motion Range Damage Critical
Small Medium
Gladius, Short sword 15 5 P T -- 1d4+1 1d6 19-20/X2
Hand axe 3 4 S S 10 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
Throwing axe 4 3 S S 20 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
Light pick 5 4 P S -- 1d6 1d6+1 X3
What is PA damage?
Perhaps you are right about dropping the one-hand / two-hand idea. I'll revise with that taken into account.
Anyway, here is some more material to look over.
Thanks!
Two-Handed
Weapon
Cost Weight Type Motion Range Damage Critical
Small Medium
Quarterstaff 0.5 6 B S -- 1d4+1 1d6+1 X3
Great Club 4 10 B S -- 1d6+1 2d4 X3
Martial Weapons
Weapon
Cost Weight Type Motion Range Damage Critical
Small Medium
Gladius, Short sword 15 5 P T -- 1d4+1 1d6 19-20/X2
Hand axe 3 4 S S 10 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
Throwing axe 4 3 S S 20 1d4+1 1d6+1 X2
Light pick 5 4 P S -- 1d6 1d6+1 X3
As long as I don't have to prepare/sit in on a game that keeps tabs on all that, I won't keep typing up arguments. 
PA = Power Attack. You get double the benefit if you're using a twohander.
Speaking of twohanded weapons: they typically had longer reach than onehanders. Are you going to incorporate that too? It's quite essential if you're willing to keep account of the swinging motions of weapons, since reach also interacts with how effective a unit is.
On top of that: Gladii (both the Spanish/Iberian as the Celtic types) were at least as much used as slashing/hacking weapons than as stabbing/thrusting weapons. (At least, that's what I learnt after 5 years of Ancient History at university.) My point is that it's hard to put a weapon in a single use-motion category: Quarterstaffs perform some of their deadliest moves when stabbing, and several caterogories of spears slash as well as stab.
PA = Power Attack. You get double the benefit if you're using a twohander.
Speaking of twohanded weapons: they typically had longer reach than onehanders. Are you going to incorporate that too? It's quite essential if you're willing to keep account of the swinging motions of weapons, since reach also interacts with how effective a unit is.
On top of that: Gladii (both the Spanish/Iberian as the Celtic types) were at least as much used as slashing/hacking weapons than as stabbing/thrusting weapons. (At least, that's what I learnt after 5 years of Ancient History at university.) My point is that it's hard to put a weapon in a single use-motion category: Quarterstaffs perform some of their deadliest moves when stabbing, and several caterogories of spears slash as well as stab.